On 01/04/2012 07:46 PM, RJ Atkinson wrote:
>> How about stateless translators translating TCP traffic, and sending an
>> ICMPv6 PTB traffic for the same reasons as discussed for the UDP case?
> 
> Good point.

My take is: As noted in draft-gont-6man-ipv6-atomic-fragments, just
process such atomic fragments as non fragmented traffic, and be done
with it. Trying to make a distinction whether atomic fragments <1280
should be allowed or not (and trying to figure out what we'd break in
the process) doesn't make much sense, since such fragments can be
processed (regardless of their size) as safely as non-fragmented traffic.

Best regards,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [email protected]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492



--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to